THE EFFECT OF INCREASING THE RANGE OF ALTERNATIVES ON MEASURES OF JOB VALUES (DECISION MAKING, VOCATION)

This study was designed to test the effects of increasing the range of job alternatives on four measures of job value. The dependent measures were tested for range effects by contrasting changes produced in a treatment group, due to increasing the range of alternatives, to those produced in a control group, due to repeating the measures with no increase in range. The treatment group was presented a set of 27 low-ranging job alternatives on Trial 1 and a set of higher ranging alternatives on Trial 2. The control group was divided in half. One half received two trials at the low range condition; the other half received two trials at the high range condition.;By using a multimethod approach with separate direct and indirect measures of weight, graphical measures of scale values, and estimates of perceived attribute intercorrelation, the effects of range on each element of the decision making model were separately tested. The weight parameter of the model referred to the importance of a job attribute, while scale value referred to the level or amount of a job attribute.;It was hypothesized that increasing the range of alternatives would decrease the perceived differences between scale levels of the attributes but would have less effect on the measures of weight or importance of the attributes. These hypotheses were confirmed as was the predicted increase in the mean rating for the treatment group compared to that of the control group. The fourth hypothesis, which predicted that increases in range would increase the ratings of perceived intercorrelation for the attributes, was not supported by the data.;Results were interpreted to suggest that importance weights were relatively stable but that the perceived differences between specific scale values would change depending on the range of alternatives presented.;Sixty subjects, 45 males and 15 females, aged 17 to 19, responded to questions on 4 paper and pencil instruments in experimental sessions that lasted between 1 1/2 and 2 hours. The four dependent measures were: (1) magnitude estimation ratings of 27 possible jobs, (2) direct estimates of attribute weights by allocating 100 points among the three attributes; (3) scaled utility values plotted on attribute graphs; and (4) ratings of the perceived correlations among the three job attributes (Salary, Interest, and Status).